Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahamas–Philippines relations


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. —Tom Morris (talk) 06:12, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Bahamas–Philippines relations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:GNG. no significant coverage, no resident embassies, no significant trade, no state visits. this article hinges off a single issue that the Bahamas government wants to restrict foreign workers affecting the 1000 Filipinos living there. 1000 is not a lot, considering that there are over 9 million Overseas Filipinos. LibStar (talk) 00:57, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 05:53, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 06:00, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:35, 31 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Not these country relations articles again... epzik 8 20:18, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Finnegas (talk) 10:23, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep IMHO bilateral relations are always intrinsically notable, and they can be almost always sourced reliably. Even the very fact that the relationship is factually trivial is an interesting information to the reader, while the absence of the article does not imply so: it just leaves the reader in the dark -- Cycl o pia  talk  13:06, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * just because something can be sourced does not mean automatic article. there's coverage of my local police station yet it doesn't get a WP article. LibStar (talk) 05:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If there is coverage, it would pass WP:GNG, therefore it could get one. -- Cycl o pia talk  13:45, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Sources do not demonstrate notability, and there's no reason to think that there would be a notable level of contact between these two countries. Nick-D (talk) 08:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.